Facebook is actively removing postings I'm making today.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@Piousunyn Yes, we have long known the true colors (green money, above all, gained no matter how) of FB — and of the tech-bro world in general. No surprises here. Still important to share information about what they're doing so that we all remain informed.

[alliflowers@talkedabout.social]

@wdlindsy I’m posting it to my account. We’ll see what happens.

[callisto@disabled.social]

@wdlindsy OTOH, I posted this on my county Democratic Party's FB page five days ago and it's still up. I'm guessing it's the phrase "white women" that got your first post TOS'd - FB is well known for TOS'ing any mention of whiteness.

(What prompted the post was a call from a male lifelong Republican who was afraid of retaliation if he votes for Democrats but Trump wins the election.)

[beingreal@mastodon.world]

@wdlindsy

God made man in his own image, and give him dominion over the beasts of the field, etc.

And which one of the billions, even trillions, of creatures is THE ONLY ONE that wipes out thousands of species every day and is currently set on raping and destroying the only planet we have?

Yet people believe all that guff.

Religion is nothing more than a form of control.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@beingreal And then there, precisely in the religous groups that point to those very scriptures, longstanding and powerful trends that move in just the opposite direction. Would the world be better to extinguish those witnesses and their lights? How would that make anti-religionists any different from dogmatic, overweening religionists stressing their right to dominate?

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@callisto Yes, I thought perhaps that was the trigger. And that, of course, inevitably favors all those who want to suppress discussion of how race determines so many of our choices. And that inevitably favors one of the two parties — so that FB censorship is far from honest and even-handed.

[radiojammor@mastodon.scot]

@wdlindsy @Swalsh I posted a headline and a link from a UK based newsite, which was an opinion piece about activism, which was clearly their article, and it got pulled-up for being "misleading", along with another historical post. I have appealed them both as this is a clear nonsense (they could have pulled many more on the same basis, but none are actually misleading), so it looks like the AI pulled out a recent one for some reason and an older one for the same reason as justification.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@AlliFlowers Please let me know. I'd be curious. In the 2016 election cycle, any time I posted anything with the phrase "white evangelicals," Facebook yanked it. People told me this was "just" the algorithm at work, but I think there's inbuilt censorship that also targets certain people's accounts if others have complained and reported to try to shut them down.

[alliflowers@talkedabout.social]

@wdlindsy I posted the image with only “FYI” as the text above.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@AlliFlowers Please let me know if FB takes it down. I posted it with no comment at all — only the image.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@radiojammor @Swalsh I've had Facebook yank postings immediately when I posted an excerpt by Ruth Ben-Ghiat and also by Christa Brown. Ben-Ghiat was reporting on her blog that lots of others were telling her FB was taking down postings linking to her. In the case of Christa Brown, I think it's her discussion of sexual abuse in the Southern Baptist church that caused the reaction — yet FB never pulls down postings I made about the sexual abuse situation in the Catholic church.

[radiojammor@mastodon.scot]

@wdlindsy @Swalsh I do not know who those people are, I am not in your country and I have posted nothing along those lines. What you are indicating may be only part of what is going on.

[alliflowers@talkedabout.social]

@wdlindsy I definitely will.

[beingreal@mastodon.world]

@wdlindsy

It wouldn't but none of that justifies belief in the invisible man.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@beingreal I would think myself to be extremely arrogant to inform others that what they claim is visible to them but is not visible to me is non-existent. I wonder what might give me the right to make that claim about things like hope, imagination, love, all sorts of things that might be very visible to someone else while not visible to me. I find dogmatism not only off-putting but downright repulsive, whether it emanates from religion or anti-religious groups.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@AlliFlowers Thank you!

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@radiojammor @Swalsh Ruth Ben-Ghiat is a well-known commentator on authoritarianism. Her book Strongmen is an outstanding study of authoritarianism. Christa Brown recently published a book Baptistland about her struggle to deal with the cover-up of sexual abuse in the Southern Baptist Convention — including her own abuse by a pastor when she was a teen.

[billmcguire@universeodon.com]

@wdlindsy @AlliFlowers

you're not wrong. I posted a comical sign taken from an American Indian group off of Threads, and FB took it down twice. Here's what it said:
(Indian Face on top) INDIAN PARKING ONLY. ALL OTHERS NEED A RESERVATION

I loved it and shared it for my followers in My Stories. Twice they took it down, but so far it has survived when I shared it to my FB page and typed: This is comedy. Don't take it down.

[beingreal@mastodon.world]

@wdlindsy

So you're not dogmatic about your views of one Donald Trump.

I too am repulsed by people who make statements about dogma while being dogmatic.
See, it's very easy to be flippant.

[wdlindsy@toad.social]

@BillMcGuire @AlliFlowers Unfortunately, I had no choice: Facebook itself took that posting down and immediately removed another one of mine yesterday, informing me after that that I have various penalties leveled against my account until November 19. Interesting, isn't it, that that time frame silences me until two weeks after the election? I've never had this happen before with my Facebook account. People say it's "just" the algorithm, but more is at work here than that.